Monthly Archives: October 2018

The great scholar of Ahlus Sunnah Mufti Hashmat Ali Khan (ra), sent this fatwa of Hassamul Harmayn to all the scholars of Indian subcontinent of that time (India, Pakistan and Bangladesh being one at that time)

Two hundred and sixty eight (268) leading Muftis of Indian sub-continent of that time issued the fatwa on these 5 personalities ….. It should be noted that 268 Muftis were all leading muftis from the madarsa of Firang mahal, Rampur, Hyderabad (Deccan), Sindh, Lahore, Agra, Surat… etc. He published those fatwa under the name of ‘As Sawahir rul Hindiya’

Here we are producing a response to such claims extracted and translated from the Urdu Kitaab “Dast o Girebaan” written by Maulana Abu Ayyub Qaadri where he has addressed a Qabar Pujari echoeing the same rubbish:

This has to be known to Sarfaraz Sahib (Maulana Sarfaraz Khan Safdar (rahmatullaahi ‘alaih) also known as Imaam Ahlus-Sunnah Wal-Jamaa’ah – Islam Reigns)that not only ‘Ala Hadhrat (this title is referred to Ahmad Radha Khan barelwi by his cult follower, the founder of Ahlul-bid’ah qabr pujaari sect who label themselves as Ahle-sunnat. He was a great deviate of his time due to whom a good number of Ummah have deviated from the path of Ahlus-Sunnah Wal-Jamaa’ah – Islam Reigns)has done takfeer (to declare someone to be a kaafir – Islam Reigns)of the Deobandis but the ‘Ulamaa of Haram & approximately 250 ‘Ulama of Hindustaan (india) have also made takfeer on them.” [Tanqeedi Jaaizah Pg-73]

Mr. Ghulam leave off your stubbornness & anger. Those individuals from the Ahlul-‘Arab who endorsed the kitaab “Hussaamul-Haramain” where all drowned in the love of faadhil bareylwi, as described by one of the lover of ‘Alaa Hadhrat. ‘Alaa Hadhrat presented the explanation of his fatawa to the ‘Ulama of Haramain on 21 Dhul-Hijjah 1323. They having been drowned in love & affection wrote footnotes on it too. (Al-Meezaan, Imam Ahmad Radha Number 428)

And Mr. Ghulam there is a famous example,

حب الشئ، يعمي ويصم

So they (the ‘Ulamaa of ‘Arab – Islam Reigns) acted as exemplified in this Hadith.

Regarding (the kitaab) “Sawaarim Hindiyyah”, everyone (related to it were those who – Islam Reigns) spoke the language of barelwiyat & all of them were (staunch – Islam Reigns) barelwis.

If this is the only proof then, (the kitaab) Khanjar-e-Imaani which was which was written in refutation of Sawaarim Hindiyyah should also be read, in which 390 Akaabir of Hindustaan (India) have endorsed the fatwa of kufr upon your elders (barelwis – Islam Reigns) [This book can be downloaded from here]. And another kitaab Baraa-atul-Abraar ‘Anil-Maqaa-adil-Athraar in which 640 ‘Ulama have supported the Akaabir of Deoband & have refuted the takfeer done on the Ahlus-Sunnah Deoband in the kitaab Hussaamul-Haramain.

Why are you unable to see all this..? The purpose of Mr. Ghulam (and like-minded barelwis – Islam Reigns) is not (acceptance of – Islam Reigns) Haqq & (to act with – Islam Reigns) Honesty but to conceal the Haqq, just like their fore-father Ahmad Radha Khan.

Within a century after the death of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) the Muslims not only conquered new lands, but also became scientific innovators with originality and productivity. They hit the source ball of knowledge over the fence to Europe. By the ninth century, Islamic medical practice had advanced from talisman and theology to hospitals with wards, doctors who had to pass tests, and the use of technical terminology. The then Baghdad General Hospital incorporated innovations which sound amazingly modern. The fountains cooled the air near the wards of those afflicted with fever; the insane were treated with gentleness; and at night the pain of the restless was soothed by soft music and storytelling. The prince and pauper received identical attention; the destitute upon discharge received five gold pieces to sustain them during convalescence. While Paris and London were places of mud streets and hovels, Baghdad, Cairo and Cardboard had hospitals open to both male and female patients; staffed by attendants of both sexes. These medical centers contained libraries pharmacies, the system of interns, externs, and nurses. There were mobile clinics to reach the totally disabled, the disadvantaged and those in remote areas. There were regulations to maintain quality control on drugs. Pharmacists became licensed professionals and were pledged to follow the physician’s prescriptions. Legal measures were taken to prevent doctors from owning or holding stock. in a pharmacy. The extent to which Islamic medicine advanced in the fields of medical education, hospitals, bacteriology, medicine, anesthesia, surgery, pharmacy, ophthalmology, psychotherapy and psychosomatic diseases are presented briefly.

INTRODUCTION
Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) who is ranked number one by Michael Hart, a Jewish scholar, in his book The 100: The Most Influential Persons in History, was able to unite the Arab tribes who had been torn by revenge, rivalry, and internal fights, and produced a strong nation acquired and ruled simultaneously, the two known empires at that time, namely the Persian and Byzantine Empires. The Islamic Empire extended from the Atlantic Ocean on the West to the borders of China on the East. Only 80 years after the death of their Prophet, the Muslims crossed to Europe to rule Spain for more than 700 years. The Muslims preserved the cultures of the conquered lands. However when the Islamic Empire became weak, most of the Islamic contributions in science were destroyed. The Mongols burnt Baghdad (1258 A.D.) out of barbarism, and the Spaniards demolished most of the Islamic heritage in Spain out of hatred.

The Islamic Empire for more than 1000 years remained the most advanced and civilized nation in the world. This is because Islam stressed the importance and respect of learning, forbade destruction, developed in Muslims the respect for authority and discipline, and tolerance for other religions. The Muslims recognized excellence and hungering intellectually, were avid for the wisdom of the world of Galen, Hippocrates, Rufus of Ephesus, Oribasius, Discorides and Paul of Aegina. By the tenth century their zeal and enthusiasm for learning resulted in all essential Greek medical writings being translated into Arabic in Damascus, Cairo, and Baghdad. Arabic became the International Language of learning and diplomacy. The center of scientific knowledge and activity shifted eastward, and Baghdad emerged as the capital of the scientific world. The Muslims became scientific innovators with originality and productivity. Islamic medicine is one of the most famous and best known facets of Islamic civilization, and in which the Muslims most excelled. The Muslims were the great torchbearers of international scientific research. They hit the source ball of knowledge over the fence to Europe. In the words of Campbell’ “The European medical system is Arabian not only in origin but also in its structure. The Arabs are the intellectual forebearers of the Europeans.”

The aim of this paper is to prove that the Islamic Medicine was 1,000 years ahead of its times. The paper covers areas such as medical education, hospitals, bacteriology, medicine, anesthesia, surgery, ophthalmology, pharmacy, and psychotherapy.

MEDICAL EDUCATION
In 636 A.D., the Persian City of Jundi-Shapur, which originally meant beautiful garden, was conquered by the Muslims with its great university and hospital intact. Later the Islamic medical schools developed on the Jundi-Shapur pattern. Medical education was serious and systematic. Lectures and clinical sessions included in teaching were based on the apprentice system. The advice given by Ali ibnul-Abbas (Haly Abbas: -994 -A.D.) to medical students is as timely today as it was then’. “And of those things which were incumbent on the student of this art (medicine) are that he should constantly attend the hospitals and sick houses; pay unremitting attention to the conditions and circumstances of their intimates, in company with the most astute professors of medicine, and inquire frequently as to the state of the patients and symptoms apparent in them, bearing in mind what he has read about these variations, and what they indicate of good or evil.”

Razi (Rhazes: 841-926 A.D.) advised the medical students while they were seeing a patient to bear in mind the classic symptoms of a disease as given in text books and compare them with what they found.

The ablest physicians such as Razi (Al-Rhazes), Ibn-Sina (Avicenna: 980-1037 A.D.) and Ibn Zuhr (Avenzoar: 116 A.D.) performed the duties of both hospital directors and deans of medical schools at the same time. They studied patients and prepared them for student presentation. Clinical reports of cases were written and preserved for teaching’. Registers were maintained.

Training in Basic Sciences
Only Jundi-Shapur or Baghdad had separate schools for studying basic sciences. Candidates for medical study received basic preparation from private tutors through private lectures and self study. In Baghdad anatomy was taught by dissecting the apes, skeletal studies, and didactics. Other medical schools taught anatomy through lectures and illustrations. Alchemy was once of the pre-requisites for admission to medical school. The study of medicinal herbs and pharmacognosy rounded out the basic training. A number of hospitals maintained barbel gardens as a source of drugs for the patients and a means of instruction for the students.

Once the basic training was completed the candidate was admitted as an apprentice to a hospital where, at the beginning, he was assigned in a large group to a young physician for indoctrination, preliminary lectures, and familiarization with library procedures and uses. During this pre-clinical period, most of the lectures were on pharmacology and toxicology and the use of antidotes.

Clinical training: The next step was to give the student full clinical training. During this period students were assigned in small groups to famous physicians and experienced instructors, forward rounds, discussions, lectures, and reviews. Early in this period therapeutics and pathology were taught. There was a strong emphasis on clinical instruction and some Muslim physicians contributed brilliant observations that have stood the test of time. As the students progressed in their studies they were exposed more and more to the subjects of diagnosis and judgment. Clinical observation and physical examination were stressed. Students (clinical clerks) were asked to examine a patient and make a diagnosis of the ailment. Only after an had failed would the professor make the diagnosis himself. While performing physical examination, the students were asked to examine and report six major factors: the patients’ actions, excreta, the nature and location of pain, and swelling and effuvia of the body. Also noted was color and feel of the skin – whether hot, cool, moist, dry, flabby. Yellowness in the whites of the eye (jaundice) and whether or not the patient could bend his back (lung disease) was also considered important.

After a period of ward instructions, students, were assigned to outpatient areas. After examining the patients they reported their findings to the instructors. After discussion, treatment was decided on and prescribed. Patients who were too ill were admitted as inpatients. The keeping of records for every patient was the responsibility of the students.

Curriculum: There was a difference in the clinical curriculum of different medical schools in their courses; however the mainstay was usually internal medicine. Emphasis was placed on clarity and brevity in describing a disease and the separation of each entity. Until the time of Ibn Sina the description of meningitis was confused with acute infection accompanied by delirium. Ibn Sina described the symptoms of meningitis with such clarity and brevity that there is very little that can be added after 1,000 years. Surgery was also included in the curriculum. After completing courses, some students specialized under famous specialists. Some others specialized while in clinical training. According to Elgood many surgical procedures such as amputation, excision of varicose veins and hemorrhoids were required knowledge. Orthopedics was widely taught, and the use of plaster of Paris for casts after reduction of fractures was routinely shown to students. This method of treating fractures was re-discovered in the West in 1852. Although ophthalmology was practiced widely, it was not taught regularly in medical schools. Apprenticeship to an eye doctor was the preferred way of specializing in ophthalmology. Surgical treatment of cataract was very common. Obstetrics was left to midwives. Medical practitioners consulted among themselves and with specialists. Ibn Sina and Hazi both widely practiced and taught psychotherapy. After completing the training, the medical graduate was not ready to enter practice, until he passed the licensure examination. It is important to note that there existed a Scientific Association which had been formed in the hospital of Mayyafariqin to discuss the conditions and diseases of the patients.

Licensing of Physicians: In Baghdad in 931 A.D. Caliph Al-Muqtadir learned that a patient had died as the result of a physician’s error. There upon he ordered his chief physician, Sinan ibn Thabit bin Qurrah to examine all those who practiced the art of healing. In the first year of the decree more than 860 were examined in Baghdad alone. From that time on, licensing examinations were required and administered in various places. Licensing Boards were set up under a government official called Muhtasib or inspector general. The Muhtasib also inspected weights and measures of traders and pharmacists. Pharmacists were employed as inspectors to inspect drugs and maintain quality control of drugs sold in a pharmacy or apothecary. What the present Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is doing in America today was done in Islamic medicine 1,000 years ago. The chief physician gave oral and practical examinations, and if the young physician was successful, the Muhtasib administered the Hippocratic oath and issued a license. After 1,000 years licensing of physicians has been implemented in the West, particularly in America by the State Licensing Board in Medicine. For specialists we have American Board of Medical Specialties such as in Medicine, Surgery, Radiology, etc. European medical schools followed the pattern set by the Islamic medical schools and even in the early nineteenth century, students at the Sorbonne could not graduate without reading Ibn Sina’s Qanun (Cannon). According to Razi a physician had to satisfy two condition for selection: firstly, he was to be fully conversant with the new and the old medical literature and secondly, he must have worked in a hospital as house physician.

HOSPITALS
The development of efficient hospitals was an outstanding contribution of Islamic medicine. Hospitals served all citizens free without any regard to their color, religion, sex, age or social status. The hospitals were run by government and the directors of hospitals were physicians.

Hospitals had separate wards for male patients and female patients. Each ward was furnished with a nursing staff and porters of the sex of the patients to be treated therein. Different diseases such as fever, wounds, infections, mania, eye conditions, cold diseases, diarrhea, and female disorders were allocated different wards. Convalescents had separate sections within them. Hospitals provided patients with unlimited water supply and with bathing facilities. Only qualified and licensed physicians were allowed by law to practice medicine. The hospitals were teaching hospitals educating medical students. They had housing for students and house-staff. They contained pharmacies dispensing free drugs to patients. Hospitals had their own conference room and expensive libraries containing the most up-to-date books. According to Haddad, the library of the Tulum Hospital which was founded in Cairo in 872 A.D. (1,100 years ago) had 100,000 books. Universities, cities and hospitals acquired large libraries (Mustansiriyya University in Baghdad contained 80,000 volumes; the library of Cordova 600,000 volumes; that of Cairo 2,000,000 and that of Tripoli 3,000,000 books), physicians had their own extensive personal book collections, at a time when printing was unknown and book editing was done by skilled and specialized scribes putting in long hours of manual labour.

For the first time in history, these hospitals kept records of patients and their medical care.

From the point of view of treatment the hospital was divided into an out- patient department and an inpatient department. The system of the in-patient department differed only slightly from that of today. At Tulun hospital, on admission the patients were given special apparel while their clothes, money, and valuables were stored until the time of their discharge. On discharge, each patient – received five gold pieces to support himself until he could return to work.

The hospital and medical school at Damascus had elegant rooms and an extensive library. Healthy people are said to have feigned illness in order to enjoy its cuisine. There was a separate hospital in Damascus for lepers, while, in Europe, even six centuries later, condemned lepers were burned to death by royal decree.

The Qayrawan Hospital (built in 830 A.D. in Tunisia) was characterized by spacious separate wards, waiting rooms for visitors and patients, and female nurses from Sudan, an event representing the first use of nursing in Arabic history. The hospital also provided facilities for performing prayers.

The Al-Adudi hospital (built in 981 A.D. in Baghdad) was furnished with die best equipment and supplies known at the time. It had interns, residents, and 24 consultants attending its professional activities, An Abbasid minister, Ali ibn Isa, requested the court physician, Sinan ibn Thabit, to organize regular visiting of prisons by medical officers. At a time when paris and London were places of mud streets and hovels, Baghdad, Cairo, and Cordova had hospitals which incorporated innovations which sound amazingly modern. It was chiefly in the humaneness of patient care, however, that the hospitals of Islam excelled. Near the wards of those afflicted with fever, fountains cooled the air; the insane were treated with gentleness; and at night music and storytelling soothed the patients.

The Bimaristans (hospitals) were of two types – the fixed and the mobile. The mobile hospitals were transported upon beasts of burden and were erected from time to time as required. The physicians in the mobile clinics were of the same standing as those who served the fixed hospitals. Similar moving hospitals accompanied the armies in the field. The field hospitals were well equipped with medicaments, instruments, tents and a staff of doctors, nurses, and orderlies. The traveling clinics served the totally disabled, the disadvantaged and those in remote areas. These hospitals were also used by prisoners, and by the general public, particularly in times of epidemics.

BACTERIOLOGY
Al-Razi was asked to choose a site for a new hospital when he came to Baghdad. First he deduced which was the most hygienic area by observing where the fresh pieces of meat he had hung in various parts of the city decomposed least quickly.

Ibn Sina stated explicitly that the bodily secretion is contaminated by foul foreign earthly body before getting the infection. Ibn Khatima stated that man is surrounded by minute bodies which enter the human system and cause disease.

In the middle of the fourteenth century “black death” was ravaging Europe and before which Christians stood helpless, considering it an act of God.

At that time Ibn al Khatib of Granada composed a treatise in the defense of the theory of infection in the following way: To those who say, “How can we admit the possibility of infection while the religious law denies it?” We reply that the existence of contagion is established by experience, investigation, the evidence of the senses and trustworthy reports. These facts constitute a sound argument. The fact of infection becomes clear to the investigator who notices how he who establishes contact with the afflicted gets the disease, whereas he who is not in contact remains safe, and how transmission is effected through garments, vessels and earrings.

Al-Razi wrote the first medical description of smallpox and measles – two important infectious diseases. He described the clinical difference between the two diseases so vividly that nothing since has been added. Ibn Sina suggested the communicable nature of tuberculosis. He is said to have been the first to describe the preparation and properties of sulphuric acid and alcohol. His recommendation of wine as the best dressing for wounds was very popular in medieval practice. However Razi was the first to use silk sutures and alcohol for hemostatis. He was the first to use alcohol as an antiseptic.

ANESTHESIA
Ibn Sina originated the idea of the use of oral anesthetics. He recognized opium as the most powerful mukhadir (an intoxicant or drug). Less powerful anesthetics known were mandragora, poppy, hemlock, hyoscyamus, deadly nightshade (belladonna), lettuce seed, and snow or ice cold water. The Arabs invented the soporific sponge which was the precursor of modem anesthesia. It was a sponge soaked with aromatics and narcotics and held to the patient’s nostrils.

The use of anesthesia was one of the reasons for the rise of surgery in the Islamic world to the level of an honourable speciality, while in Europe, surgery was belittled and practiced by barbers and quacks. The Council of Tours in 1163 A.D. declared Surgery is to be abandoned by the schools of medicine and by all decent physicians.” Burton stated that “anesthetics have been used in surgery throughout the East for centuries before ether and chloroform became the fashion in civilized West.”

SURGERY
Al-Razi is attributed to be the first to use the seton in surgery and animal gut for sutures.

Abu al-Qasim Khalaf Ibn Abbas Al-Zahrawi (930-1013 A.D.) known to the West as Abulcasis, Bucasis or Alzahravius is considered to be the most famous surgeon in Islamic medicine. In his book Al-Tasrif, he described hemophilia for the first time in medical history. The book contains the description and illustration of about 200 surgical instruments many of which were devised by Zahrawi himself. In it Zahrawi stresses the importance of the study of Anatomy as a fundamental prerequisite to surgery. He advocates the re implantation of a fallen tooth and the use of dental prosthesis carved from cow’s bone, an improvement over the wooden dentures worn by the first President of America George Washington seven centuries later. Zahrawi appears to be the first surgeon in history to use cotton (Arabic word) in surgical dressings in the control of hemorrhage, as padding in the splinting of fractures, as a vaginal padding in fractures of the pubis and in dentistry. He introduced the method for the removal of kidney stones by cutting into the urinary bladder. He was the first to teach the lithotomy position for vaginal operations. He described tracheotomy, distinguished between goiter and cancer of the thyroid, and explained his invention of a cauterizing iron which he also used to control bleeding. His description of varicose veins stripping, even after ten centuries, is almost like modern surgery. In orthopedic surgery he introduced what is called today Kocher’s method of reduction of shoulder dislocation and patelectomy, 1,000 years before Brooke reintroduced it in 1937.

Ibn Sina’s description of the surgical treatment of cancer holds true even today after 1,000 years. He says the excision must be wide and bold; all veins running to the tumor must be included in the amputation. Even if this is not sufficient, then the area affected should be cauterized.

The surgeons of Islam practiced three types of surgery: vascular, general, and orthopedic, Ophthalmic surgery was a speciality which was quite distinct both from medicine and surgery. They freely opened the abdomen and drained the peritoneal cavity in the approved modern style. To an unnamed surgeon of Shiraz is attributed the first colostomy operation. Liver abscesses were treated by puncture and exploration.

Surgeons all over the world practice today unknowingly several surgical procedures that Zahrawi introduced 1,000 years ago .

MEDICINE
The most brilliant contribution was made by Al-Razi who differentiated between smallpox and measles, two diseases that were hitherto thought to be one single disease. He is credited with many contributions, which include being the first to describe true distillation, glass retorts and luting, corrosive sublimate, arsenic, copper sulfate, iron sulphate, saltpeter, and borax in the treatment of disease . He introduced mercury compounds as purgatives (after testing them on monkeys); mercurial ointments and lead ointment.” His interest in urology focused on problems involving urination, venereal disease, renal abscess, and renal and vesical calculi. He described hay-fever or allergic rhinitis.

Some of the Arab contributions include the discovery of itch mite of scabies (Ibn Zuhr), anthrax, ankylostoma and the guinea worm by Ibn Sina and sleeping sickness by Qalqashandy. They described abscess of the mediastinum. They understood tuberculosis and pericarditis.

Al Ash’ath demonstrated gastric physiology by pouring water into the mouth of an anesthetized lion and showed the distensibility and movements of the stomach, preceding Beaumont by about 1,000 years” Abu Shal al- Masihi explained that the absorption of food takes place more through the intestines than the stomach. Ibn Zuhr introduced artificial feeding either by gastric tube or by nutrient enema. Using the stomach tube the Arab physicians performed gastric lavage in case of poisoning. Ibn Al-Nafis was the first to discover pulmonary circulation.

Ibn Sina in his masterpiece Al-Quanun (Canon), containing over a million words, described complete studies of physiology, patlhology and hygiene. He specifically discoursed upon breast cancer, poisons, diseases of the skin, rabies, insomnia, childbirth and the use of obstetrical forceps, meningitis, amnesia, stomach ulcers, tuberculosis as a contagious disease, facial tics, phlebotomy, tumors, kidney diseases and geriatric care. He defined love as a mental disease.

OPHTHALMOLOGY
The doctors of Islam exhibited a high degree of proficiency and certainly were foremost in the treatment of eye diseases. Words such as retina and cataract are of Arabic origin. In ophthalmology and optics lbn al Haytham (965-1039 A.D.) known to the West as Alhazen wrote the Optical Thesaurus from which such worthies as Roger Bacon, Leonardo da Vinci and Johannes Kepler drew theories for their own writings. In his Thesaurus he showed that light falls on the retina in the same manner as it falls on a surface in a darkened room through a small aperture, thus conclusively proving that vision happens when light rays pass from objects towards the eye and not from the eye towards the objects as thought by the Greeks. He presents experiments for testing the angles of incidence and reflection, and a theoretical proposal for magnifying lens (made in Italy three centuries later). He also taught that the image made on the retina is conveyed along the optic nerve to the brain. Razi was the first to recognize the reaction of the pupil to light and Ibn Sina was the first to describe the exact number of extrinsic muscles of the eyeball, namely six. The greatest contribution of Islamic medicine in practical ophthalmology was in the matter of cataract. The most significant development in the extraction of cataract was developed by Ammar bin Ali of Mosul, who introduced a hollow metallic needle through the sclerotic and extracted the lens by suction. Europe rediscovered this in the nineteenth century.

PHARMACOLOGY
Pharmacology took roots in Islam during the 9th century. Yuhanna bin Masawayh (777-857 A.D.) started scientific and systematic applications of therapeutics at the Abbasids capital. His students Hunayn bin Ishaq al-lbadi (809-874 A.D.) and his associates established solid foundations of Arabic medicine and therapeutics in the ninth century. In his book al-Masail Hunayn outlined methods for confirming the pharmacological effectiveness of drugs by experimenting with them on humans. He also explained the importance of prognosis and diagnosis of diseases for better and more effective treatment.

Pharmacy became an independent and separate profession from medicine and alchemy. With the wild sprouting of apothecary shops, regulations became necessary and imposed to maintain quality control.” The Arabian apothecary shops were regularly inspected by a syndic (Muhtasib) who threatened the merchants with humiliating corporal punishments if they adulterated drugs.” As early as the days of al-Mamun and al-Mutasim pharmacists had to pass examinations to become licensed professionals and were pledged to follow the physician’s prescriptions. Also by this decree, restrictive measures were legally placed upon doctors, preventing them from owning or holding stock in a pharmacy.

Methods of extracting and preparing medicines were brought to a high art, and their techniques of distillation, crystallization, solution, sublimation, reduction and calcination became the essential processes of pharmacy and chemistry. With the help of these techniques, the Saydalanis (pharmacists) introduced new drugs such as camphor, senna, sandalwood, rhubarb, musk, myrrh, cassia, tamarind, nutmeg, alum, aloes, cloves, coconut, nuxvomica, cubebs, aconite, ambergris and mercury. The important role of the Muslims in developing modern pharmacy and chemistry is memorialized in the significant number of current pharmaceutical and chemical terms derived from Arabic: drug, alkali, alcohol, aldehydes, alembic, and elixir among others, not to mention syrups and juleps. They invented flavorings extracts made of rose water, orange blossom water, orange and lemon peel, tragacanth and other attractive ingredients. Space does not permit me to list the contributions to pharmacology and therapeutics, made by Razi, Zahrawi, Biruni, Ibn Butlan, and Tamimi.

PSYCHOTHERAPY
From freckle lotion to psychotherapy- such was the range of treatment practiced by the physicians of Islam. Though freckles continue to sprinkle the skin of 20th century man, in the realm of psychosomatic disorders both al-Razi and Ibn Sina achieved dramatic results, antedating Freud and Jung by a thousand years. When Razi was appointed physician-in-chief to the Baghdad Hospital, he made it the, first hospital to have a ward exclusively devoted to the mentally ill.”

Razi combined psychological methods and physiological explanations, and he used psychotherapy in a dynamic fashion, Razi was once called in to treat a famous caliph who had severe arthritis. He advised a hot bath, and while the caliph was bathing, Razi threatened him with a knife, proclaiming he was going to kill him. This deliberate provocation increased the natural caloric which thus gained sufficient strength to dissolve the already softened humours, as a result the caliph got up from is knees in the bath and ran after Razi. One woman who suffered from such severe cramps in her joints that she was unable to rise was cured by a physician who lifted her skirt, thus putting her to shame. “A flush of heat was produced within her which dissolved the rheumatic humour.”

The Arabs brought a refreshing spirit of dispassionate clarity into psychiatry. They were free from the demonological theories which swept over the Christian world and were therefore able to make clear cut clinical observations on the mentally ill.

Najab ud din Muhammad, a contemporary of Razi, left many excellent descriptions of various mental diseases. His carefully compiled observation on actual patients made up the most complete classification of mental diseases theretofore known.” Najab described agitated depression, obsessional types of neurosis, Nafkhae Malikholia (combined priapism and sexual impotence). Kutrib (a form of persecutory psychosis), Dual-Kulb (a form of mania) .

Ibn Sina recognized ‘physiological psychology’ in treating illnesses involving emotions. From the clinical perspective Ibn Sina developed a system for associating changes in the pulse rate with inner feelings which has been viewed as anticipating the word association test of Jung. He is said to have treated a terribly ill patient by feeling the patient’s pulse and reciting aloud to him the names of provinces, districts, towns, streets, and people. By noticing how the patient’s pulse quickened when names were mentioned Ibn Sina deduced that the patient was in love with a girl whose home Ibn Sina was able to locate by the digital examination. The man took Ibn Sina’s advice , married the girl , and recovered from his illness.

It is not surprising to know that at Fez, Morocco, an asylum for the mentally ill had been built early in the 8th century, and insane, asylums were built by the Arabs also in Baghdad in 705 A.D., in Cairo in 800 A.D., and in Damascus and Aleppo in 1270 A.D. In addition to baths, drugs, kind and benevolent treatment given to the mentally ill, musico-therapy and occupational therapy were also employed. These therapies were highly developed.

CONCLUSION
1,000 years ago Islamic medicine was the most advanced in the world at that time. Even after ten centuries, the achievements of Islamic medicine look amazingly modern. 1,000 years ago the Muslims were the great torchbearers of international scientific research. Every student and professional from each country outside the Islamic Empire, aspired, yearned, a dreamed to go to the Islamic universities to learn, to work, to live and to lead a comfortable life in an affluent and most advanced and civilized society. Today, in this twentieth century, the United States of America has achieved such a position. The pendulum can swing back. Fortunately Allah has given a bounty to many Islamic countries – an income over 100 billion dollars per year. Hence Islamic countries have the opportunity and resources to make Islamic science and medicine number one in the world, once again.

“Verily, among the most perfect Believers in Imaan, are those who are best in character and kindest to their wives.”

Even lifting a morsel of food to the mouth of the wife has been given the significance of ‘ibaadat (worship). It is an act of love by which the husband derives thawaab (reward in the Hereafter).

It was part of the Uswah Hasanah (Noble and beautiful Character) of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) to engage in light-hearted talk with his wives. Hadhrat Abu Hurairah (radhiallahu anhu) said:

“Allah loves a man who caresses his wife. Both of them are awarded thawaab because of this loving attitude and their rizq (worldly provision and earning) is increased.”

A man is rewarded for even a drink of water he presents to his wife. According to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam)-the rahmat (mercy) of Allah Ta’ala cascades on a couple when the husband glances at his wife with love and pleasure and she returns his glance with love and pleasure.

When a husband clasps the hand of his wife with love their sins fall from the gaps between their clasped fingers. Even mutual love between husband and wives serves as a kaffarah ‘(expiation) for sins. Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:

“When a man enters his home cheerfully, Allah creates, as a result of his happy attitude, an angel who engages in istighfar (prayers of forgiveness) on behalf of the man until the Day of Qiyaamah.”

The holy bond of true Muhabbat (love) which a husband is obliged to foster with his wife does not permit a pious husband to howl and scowl at his wife. A husband’s superiority and excellence preclude such depraved attitudes. His attitude and behaviour should be calculated to engender pleasantness in the home. Pleasantness invites the mercy of Allah Ta’ala.

Rasulullah (sallallahu alayli wasallam) said that when a loving husband sets off from the home in the service of his wife and children, he is blessed with a rank of spiritual elevation for every step he takes. On accomplishing the service, his sins are forgiven. Among the acts of thawaab and special significance to be rendered by the husband on the Day of Ashura (10th Muharram), is to spend lavishly on his family. Lavishly should not be understood to mean wasteful expenditure. Within the husband’s means he should spend on them in greater measure on the Day of Ashura.

It is the husband’s duty to sustain the holy bond of family love. The bond should not be disrupted by him showing impatience, annoyance and anger whenever his wife acts childishly, stupidly and with indiscretion. His heart must be big enough to absorb such pettiness exhibited by his wile. After all A man can acquit himself of the Shar’i obligation and

Along with the responsibility of his family (wife and children) he has to tend to his parents as well. It is therefore unjust, cruel and haraam for a wife to expect and demand that her husband ignores, neglects and abandons his parents.

Husbands should always strike the perfect balance in the observation of the rights of their families and their parents. Execution of the rights of the one should not lead to the violation of the rights of the other.

Allah Ta’ala has awarded him a higher rank, a higher intelligence and greater restraint and willpower than the woman who has been created naaqisul aql (imperfect in intelligence).

Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam)Said:

`The love created for lovers (husbands and wives) by the likes of Nikah has not been seen.”

In Islam, true and enduring love comes after marriage. Such love is holy and blessed by Allah Ta’ala. It is a love sanctioned by Allah Ta’ala. It is a love which spiritually improves the condition of the husband and wife, hence Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:

“Nikah is half of Imaan.’

The husband should cherish and treasure the love which is created by the Nikah. This holy love is sufficient to overcome the mutual differences of husband and wife. But it is only a man of piety a man who possesses understanding of the Sunnah — who will subdue his emotions and honour the demands of the holy love produced by the Nikah bond by overlooking the slight incompatibilities resulting from the differences in the temperament and disposition of the husband and wife. For the sake of sustaining the love which is mentioned in the aforementioned Hadith, the pious husband will constantly overlook and forgive the little and ineffectual outbursts of his wife. His patience secures spiritual ranks for him and his sins are forgiven.

Among the physical benefits of the true love between husband and wife is increase in the strength of the eyesight. Citing a Hadith of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), Allamah Sakhawi (rahmatullah alayli) says that a glance cast at the face of the wife is beneficial for the eyesight.

Only a husband with a good Islamic moral character will be able to offer the best love to his wife. The love which a pious husband can show to his wife by virtue of his excellent moral character can never be acquired by wealth,. physical comfort, luxury and worldly ranks. Such holy love cannot be gained and sustained by only discharging the bare minimum legal rights of the wife. The husband will have to provide more than just rights. He will have to make sacrifices and in particular restrain his temper when his wife angers him with her indiscreet and sharp remarks. The Auliya have said that a husband who adopts sabr (patience) when he is confronted by the intransigence of his wife attains the rank of a ghazi or a mujahid who returns victorious from the battlefield This is in line with the following Ahadith of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam):

“The true mujahid is he who wages jihad against his nafs.”

“A powerful man is not one who overpowers another in physical combat. Verily; a powerful man is one who controls his nafs at the time of anger.”

Islam is a religion, whereas Socialism is simply an economic institution taking finally the form of a state – a Political Institution. Both stand for some purpose – some end. The end or purpose of the latter is the physical and economic welfare of man or, in other words, the total removal or extermination of poverty from all classes of people in the state. The end or purpose of Islam, on the other hand, is the perfection of man in all forms – i.e., the elevation of man to Insan-Kamil – a perfect man. What is a perfect man? A perfect man is one who has the best of conduct and character (Akhlaq), the best of intellect (Aql), the best and finest sense for the appreciation of beauty (Husn), and has the best of health, is free from all cares and wants and is consequently the happiest of all creatures. Evidently, the last, physical and economic welfare of man, from the Islamic standpoint, is only an aspect, an element, of the end, but not an end in itself. For Socialism, on the other hand, it is an end in itself, the sole end, to which all other ends must be subordinated. This is the fundamental distinction between Islam and Socialism. But however they may differ, there is one point atleast which is common to both, namely, the principle of the eradication poverty and bringing into being freedom from want. But even so the affinity is merely in the principle as such, i.e., in the aspiration to remove poverty, but not in the ways and means or methods devised by each for the achievement of the same. The means and methods adopted by each differ violently and the point at issue, therefore, is, which of the methods is better and more successful in removing the evil of poverty and bringing into being freedom from want? Some maintained the the method devised by Socialism are better than those of Islam; others maintain that the two systems are almost identical and can be reconciles; still others maintain that they are essentially different and that the methods devised by Islam are superior to those of Socialism. I agree with the last group of people and maintain the the two systems are fundamentally different and that the means adopted by Islam are far more successful than and superior to those adopted by Socialism or any other hypothesis.

I. Socialism starts with the assumption that all men are equal and justice demands that each man should have equal share of the total wealth of the nation; that there should be an equal distribution of it among all and that there should be no distinction between man and man or class and class. But the assumption of the equality of man is erroneous, for all men are “ideally” equal, not “factually” so. Factually, some are weak and others are strong; some are vicious and others are virtuous and so on. If now the stronger and the more capable people, by sheer dint of honest labour, accumulate more wealth than the weaker and less capable people, no institution in the world has any right to deprieve such people of their wealth for the sake of equalising them with the inefficient and unworthy people. If yet they are deprieved of their honset earnings, as Socialism would have it, this would be gross injustice. Socialism, which starts with the specific object of dispensing justice to all, involves itself in the grossest injustice inconceivable.

II. Socialism further assumes that the richer and wealthier people are necessarily cruel and wicked; and that the wealth they accumulate is earned through callous and vicious means. But is wealth necessarily accumulated by such methods? Many may have earned their wealth through honset and sincere work and to deprieve them of their wealth is obvious injustice.

III. Again, all men are equal and there should be an equal distribution of wealth among all, but since the equal distribution of wealth, they maintain, is impossible so long as the instotution of Private Property exists, it must disappear. So long, they argue, as each person retains his own wealth for himself, there shall always arise a class of more prudent, capable and tactful people who would earn more than the less capable and tactful people; and once sich persons have taken a start, they will go on multiplying their wealth without much effort on their part – by investing and re-investing it in different forms. Of necessity, therefore, must Capitalism and unequal distribution of wealth result again and again from the instotution of Private Property. This institution should be totally abolished and not the individuals but the State should be the owner of all the property. The individual should entrust his all, whatever it may be, great or small, to the State, and the State should be the sole owner of “total Property.” There should be thus no “MINE” or “THINE”; all wealth should belong to the State and then the State shall have to distribute it equally among all, thus resulting in complete justice. All will have equal share from the commonwealth of the nation, in which there would be no distinction between the rich and poor and all will be equally well-provided.

But again, this position has the difficulty of its own kind. The efficiency of its own individuals ‘singly’ and that of the State ‘collectively’ will suffer considerably on that account. Man is primarily an individual and only secondarily a social being. The more capable must naturally think why, after all, should they work for the sake of others, when their own interests must necessarily suffer; why after all should they add more to their income, when that excess would always be denied to them. Again, man is primarily lazy and seeks play and happiness rather than work and strain. Left to himself, he would never work or strain himself willingly. He works only under the stress of circumstances – not work for the sake of work. Thus the less capable people in the Socialistic State would naturally think why after all should they strain themselves and work harder, if already their share of the wealth of the nation is secured; why after all should they produce more, when that more would be taken away by the State? Thus, the rich and the poor, the competent and the incompetent, would all lose interest in their work, and society would necessarily become inefficient. The result would be that the total wealth of the nation, as also the share of the individual in it, would go on decreasing from year to year, until a day would come when the share of the individual would reach a point far lower than even what a most incompetent person would have earned, if left to himself. Socialism started with the object of providing sufficient for each and all, but failed to provide even the barest minimum for any. It must give up its first and most fundament thesis, viz., “The abolition of private property” and its corollary, viz., “all property to be owned by the State.”

But even assuming that Socialism does succeed and succeeds a hundred per cent, then, in that case, each and all would be well-fed all right but none would be moral, because the ‘giving’ in the case of each is not voluntary or out of free-will. There is, indeed, no giving on the part of the individuals, live alone voluntary or involuntary. All property belongs to the State and it is the State that gives to the individual and not the individual that gives to the State. The share of the individual is not so much “given” by the individual to the State, as it is really “taken” from the individual by the State. But morality of an action consists really in “giving” things over rather than be “taken” away from. Thus a Socialistic State in this hypothesis is tantamount to a kingdom of animals in a huge jungle where there is plenty to eat and drink and where each and all are well-fed and properly stuffed, and yet all remain animals in spite of it – animals and not moral human beings.

But one might say that the question of “giving” and giving things voluntarily does certainly exist in a Socialistic State. After all, as Socialists surmise, every individual in a Socialistic State is absolutely free to give his vote to anybody, and once his original vote is freely given, his subsequent acts that follow from it are freely determined. But this is a wrong argument, the original free vote does not necessarily make all subsequent individual acts free and hence moral. I might have free voted for Mr. X to become a minister but yet it is possible that, subsequently, I might differ with his policy and conduct. If yet I obey his orders, it can be for no other reason than from fear or prudence in which morality has no share. Morality is not a matter of habitual and mechanical action according to certain principles, as Socialism would like it to be. For instance, once you have freely voted for certain principles, you shall have to follow them mechanically, necessarily and compulsorily in all your individual acts, whether you subsequently agree or disagree with them. But morality is quite the opposite of it. It is not a free act once or casually done in life but is a series of free acts ever and ever anew!.

1. Generally speaking, Socialism conceives the nature of man essentially as animal, a feeling being, with food and happiness as his sole end in life. But food, wealth and happiness are precisely the things which each man will have for himself and not share with others. Left to feelings and animal impulses as being the standard, we never share our wealth and happiness with others and never become one with them. Where we share our well-being and happiness with others, it is our reason that bids us to do so and not our feelings or animal impulses. Reason must intervene into the life of man if we are to share our wealth and woe with others and be anything better than an animal. With the dawn of this reason, new demands would be made on us – the demand or yearning to seek the truth, Goodness, beauty and holiness. But this is neither open to Socialism nor does it actually admit it. Hence the materialism and Godlessness of this system. We thus pass to the second thesis of this system.

2. Socialism assumes that the church and Priest who represent God on earth and vicious institutions and they make capital out of it. Here again we are involved in Capitalism which is their foremost duty to destroy. State and Statesmen should thus take the place of the church and the priests. The State should be all in all and nothing besides the State should exist. There should be no God, no Religion side by side with the State to inspire people and to challenge its supremacy.

But let us analyse this argument. From the casual or even wholesale badness of the priests, we are not entitled to jump to the conclusion that Religion itself is bad.

Socialism is not clear on the point that it is precisely from Religion from which all fundamentally human values first originate and then finally culminate in it. Even the economic welfare of man, as described above, would be somewhat impossible without religion. Without religion, society would be something like Hobbe’s Kingdom of wolves, where every one would perennially run at the other’s throat and be at war among themselves. All would be destruction and no production. Thuse even with Economic Welfare as the end, let alone other yearnings, it is indispensible to retain God and Religion.

Moreover, since all fundamental values originate from and culminate in Religion, it is, at the basis of all Culture and Civilisation. Without it there would be neither Culture nor Civilisation. But even if we presume that some sort of culture and civilisation can exist in spite of it, it will be grossly primitive and unworthy of man. But without a really advanced Culture and Civilisation, no nation has any moral right to Internationalism, as Socialism would have it. Hence again, Socialism would be obliged to abandon yet another thesis of its own, its Godlessness, and that too, if not for itself, at least in the interest of the Internationalism which is the third chief thesis of Socialism.

3. The starting point of Socialism is: All men are equal and therefore there should be an equal distribution of wealth among all. This necessarily leads to Internationalism which consistently followed. If all men are really equal, then not only are all individuals within the same State but also all States and people within the same world, are equal to each other. Hence all States and people should have equal share of the total wealth of the world. But who is to enforce this principle? Who is to be the torch-bearer and pioneer of it? The thought, as such, would not be acceptable to those who may have to suffer on that account. Who could compel America to share its wealth with Arabia, China, Afghanistan, etc? Evidently, this pre-supposes the existence of some one State strong enough to enforce the same thought. But here again we shall encounter the same difficulties as I have stated above. Even if a State that could enforce the thought were to come into being, the giving on the part of the individual States will not be voluntary and hence not moral. Moreover, the total wealth of the world, as also the share of the individual States, is likely to fall from year to year as it will be an involuntary imposition and man does not like it. Besides, the thought of equal distribution is not open to Socialism, for it conceives the nature of man essentially as animal, and as an animal I can never pass from the circle of “my good,” “my happiness,” to that of “your good”, “your happiness.” What is impossible as between individuals will be equally impossible as between States. Once this principle of Socialism, namely, that food and happiness is the sole end of man, is accepted, neither the individuals nor indeed the States will part with what is the only and the most valuable thing according to them.

But even assuming that the individual States could well part with their surplus, the case would be no better either from the socialist standpoint. The surplus would not go the the poorer States but to the richest and the strongest of all States. For of all States, this very Socialistic State with its materialistic background, will of necessity lapse into imperialism and its evils, indeed a worst sort of imperialism, a world-wide Imperialism, a thing which was the starting point of Socialism to fight against and eradicate in all possible forms.

To this one might object that Socialism does not really maintain that the richer States should entrust their surplus to some stronger one in order that it may distribute it among the poorer States. All that it maintains is that every State within its own sphere should have equal distribution among the individuals. But this would defeat the ideal of International Socialism only to be replaced by National Socialism. In any case, it will be simply compelled by the sheer contradictions and inconsistencies to give up one thesis after another until we shall have merely a form without content – a bare principle of the removal of poverty without its original means to work it out. But this simple principle is not peculiar to Socialism. All religions, long before Socialism, had ordained it, and even today many worldly States aspire to realize it in their own way. What I have simply formally stated, is actually proved by the hard facts of life. Already Socialism has permitted private property and has abandoned its Godlessness and Internationalism. Thus it is no more Socialism; at best it is Neo-Socialism. But Neo-Socialism is a new Socialism and is something other than Socialism, is anything but Socialism. If yet you call it Socialism, then it is like the niser’s sock, patched up with new threads again and again and over again until not a single thread of the original remains and yet it is the same old sock. This may be true of the sock for all practical purposes but not of ideologies. We now pass on to Islam to see how the problem of the removal of poverty is tackled by it.

Socialism maintains that so long as the institution of Private Property exists, the result would be Capitalism and its consequent evils. But if Private Property is abolished, the result is no better either, for efficiency would suffer and a result would be a conaiderable decrease in the total wealth of the nation, as also that of the individual. Evidently, we are involved in a sort of conflict or antinomy, for both the positions are right. The problem now is how to resolve this antinomy and how to reconcile this conflict. Islam offers a solution which is quite correct and fair.

Islam assumes that the institution of Private Property is good from the point of view of efficiency that it promotes; but it is bad from the point of view of Capitalism which it encourages. Hence Private Property should be retained as well as abolished in the same breath – retained in order to encourage its efficiency, and abolished in order to disvourage Capitalism. But how is it possible to retain a thing at one and the same time? How am I to conceive that the property is mine and yet not mine at the same time? This is possible when the concept “mine” and “not mine” is looked at from different standpoints and this is precisely the attitude which Islam which actually takes towards it. Empirically, factually and actually the property is mine all right, because it is in my possession. Hence it is natural that I should have interest in it and should promote it as much as it is in my power to do so. But transcendentally, rationally and ideally it is not mine and is God’s property, because He alone is the ultimate Creator of all things. Hence I should have no hesitation in parting ways with it, if God so desires. Hence also the synthesis of the conflicting thesis and the solution of the antinomy. The institution of Private Property is kept intact without necessarily resulting in Capitalism. The point of efficiency is combined with a set-back to Capitalism in a most harmonious way. This much abstractly speaking. We may now give three concrete illustrations.

Islam encourages the production of wealth (efficiency) and yet discourages the accumulation of the same in the hands of a few (Capitalism). This it does by the institution of the “Law of Inheritance,” by forbidding “Interest” and by the injunctions of “poor tax,” “almsgiving,” “lending without remuneration,” “gift,” “trust,” “the giving of one-third in will to anybody other than legal successors,” etc, etc.

(1) The Islamic Law of Inheritance is an immense blow to Capitalism for through it the property of man is divided and re-divided among his successors and even among the remote successors, if there are no immediate ones. In any case, the property cannot remain compact and in the hand of a few in the long run. Thus the property will circulate from person to person until many are benefited thereby; and when many are benefited, the total wealth of the nation also increases.

(2) The abolition of usury is another great set-back to Capitalism. Usury is a vicious institution and it is at the basis of Capitalism. The rich, thereby, gain more and more money without doing “any positive work.” In other words, it is the money that makes money and not the man behind it. It is the mere possession of money that brings money and not the work or toil of the person possessing the money.

In Islam it should be the man himself and not his bare money to make more money – the man and his nerves, tissues, muscles, brain, etc. Thus there is no room in the Islamic ruling State for the exploitation of the individual by the individual. The individuals would be no longer perennially under debts to money-lenders. Nor would certain States be perennially under debts to other States.

(3) Hence there would be no Capitalism, no exploitation, and therefore no poverty. Thus an Islamic ruling State, when it comes to the task of Internationalism, would never, like Socialism, lapse into Imperialism. زكاة (tithe), خيرات (alms), صدقات (charity), قرض حسنه (loan without interest), هبه (gift), امانت (deposit by way of trust), وقف (bequest), وصيت (endowment)., etc, etc., are other such measures which put a ban on Capitalism and restrain it. These institutions prevent the money from being accumulated in the hands of a few, rather it must flow from man to man and class to class in a rapid circulation. This is very nearly the essence of the economic well-being of both the individuals and the State. But one might object that these injunctions were perhaps helpful for maintaining the poor, but can hardly be expected to meet the gigantic demands and requirements of a modern State. This may be right, but nothing can stand in the way of an Islamic governing State either to impose more and more taxes or demand from the individual whatever he could spare for the amelioration of the condition of his brethren. The Qur’anic Verses: “God has purchased from believers their property and their lives in lieu of Paradise” clearly indicates that the wealth and body of a Muslim is purchased by God in lieu of Paradise and can be requisitioned when He so desires.

Further, of all these injunctions زكاة (tithe) is one form of duty, خيرات (alms), صدقات (charity), قرض حسنه (loan), هبه (gift), امانت (deposit by way of trust), وقف (bequest), وصيت (endowment)., etc, etc., form another kind of duties. Tithe (زكاة) is an absolute duty, whereas the others are meritorious duties.

Tithe (زكاة) is compulsory enforced and collected by the Khalifa in the name of God, whereas the other institutions are not so enforced by the Khalifa. Tithe (زكاة) is a duty which Muslims have necessarily and absolutely to perform; and its non-observance is a vice, and its observance a virtue. Whereas the other meritorious duties are of a nature that if we do not perform them, our act is not vice, but if we perform them, our action is virtue, indeed, a meritorious virtue – a virtue par excellence. This sort of virtue does not exist in any worldly State or organisation, not even in a Socialistic State. In a Socialistic State there is hardly any room for virtues, leave alone the meritorious ones. It is a wholesale compulsion and whatever you have in excess of your wants will be taken away from you, and you will be left on a par with others – the question of yet giving more., i.e. meritorious duties, not arising at all.

The State is all for Socialism, whereas God is the all in all for Islam. In the former the act of giving is for fear of the State, whereas in the latter it is for the fear of God. Evidently, the latter is moral action, whereas the former is only a legal one. Thus for a Muslim the act of “giving” is not only conducive to feeding others but is also helpful to his own reformation or self-perfection.

But to this, one might object that an action done out of “fear” is non-moral, whether it be for fear of God as in the case of a Muslim, or for fear of the State as in the case of a Socialist. Hence in either case the action is non-moral. But this is a wrong position. There is a radical difference between fear of God and fear of a State, the two being different in kind. The fear of God is a matter of Faith and the fear of State is a matter of “knowledge.” The object of Faith if God, who is not a concrete object; is not immediately present before me; it is my Faith in Him, indeed an ايمان بل غيب (faith in the Unknown). Evidently, His Punishment is not imminent, if I do not believe in Him; even His Punishment itself is a matter of Faith. Thus there is no compulsion in Religion, indeed, much more opposite of it. I am free to believe or not believe in God, or even to believe in one notion of God or the other. The Sword of God is not immediately present before me to compel me to believe in Him, or believe in Him one way or the other. That I yet believe in Him in spite of the absence of His punishment, amounts to complete freedom in the choive of my Faith. Thus my faith in God and the consequent fear of Him are both my own creation, are autonomous and there is no compulsion involved in it. On the contrary, the fear of the State is a fear of a concrete object, which is present before me and its punishment is imminent, if I disobey it. It is the fear of a thing outside me and of an external origin and is heteronomous. It is a thing or person other than myself who compels me to do this or that for fear of his sword present immediately before me. Hence the distinction between the two fears, of which the one is freely chosen, self-created, autonomous and hence the condition of the existence of morality, which the other is not.

In conclusion, I must say that even assuming that Islam does not succeed in exterminating poverty altogether, the case in not likely to be bad either. For the worth or dignity of a man, according to Islam, consists essentially in the character and righteousness of a man rather than in the wealth and riches possessed by him. Thus the poor in an Islamic governing State will not be looked down upon for the mere fact of poverty, nor the rich would in any way be respected for the mere fact of wealth they possess. The result would be that the rich and the poor would be all alike and shall form one brotherhood. In this brotherhood the rich would have no feeling of superiority nor the poor that of inferiority, so that there will be neither quarrel among the individuals within the State nor war among the States within the world, in spite of the inequality in wealth. All would be peace and peace and a Kingdom of God on earth would be established, in the truest sense of the term. This is precisely what the term Islam means and this is precisely what the Qur’an invites mankind into – a Peace – perfect and universal.

Hadhrat Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi (Rahmatullah alayh) had the following advice for the managements of the Madaaris:

“The Madaaris should understand that it is not necessary to teach the full course (i.e. the Dars-e-Nizaami – Aalim-Faadhil course) to every student. This should be taught selectively to only such students who have a natural compatibility, ability and affinity (with Ilm), and in whom there is Fahm-e-Saleem (sound intelligence).

Those students who lack in these qualities should be taught only the necessary masaa-il (for daily life). After teaching them the Dhuroori masaa-il, they should be advised to branch out into the world to earn.

Every person is not endowed with the ability to become a Muqtada (a leader/guide in the Muslim community). Some (in fact most) are totally unfit. To impart the full course of Ilm to them (and granting them Molvi certificates) is like handing a sword to a dacoit. It is khiyaanat (abuse of Trust).

Nowadays the Mudarriseen and Muhtamimeen (Ustaadhs and Principals) are totally oblivious of this concern. They do not scrutinize the students to determine who among them are qualified for pursuing this Ilm (at the higher level). All of them do not have munaasabat (natural affinity and compatibility with Ilm) nor do they have fahm-e-saleem. Why do they not select from among the Talaba only those who are fit for pursuing this course?

A special course should be arranged for students who lack the natural ability (for the Aalim-Faadhil course of study). They should not be taught further than this special course which should cover the Dhuroori masaa-il.”

(End of Hadhrat Thanvi’s advice)

Hadhrat Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi (Rahmatullah alayh) has described the abject putrid state of the Madaaris in mild terms. The corruption in the Madaaris at all levels, now about 70 or 80 years after the above observation of Hadhrat Thanvi, has multiplied manifold. The moral corruption of both Students and Ustaadhs today could not have been imagined by Hadhrat Thanvi (Rahmatullah alayh) in his era which was comparatively a time of sanity – a time of khair.

The lamentable condition of the Madaaris of this age is the consequence of not accepting and even not believing what Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said. He said: “He who imparts Ilm to someone unfit (for it) is like one who garlands khanaazeer (swines) with diamonds, pearls and gold.”

The truth should not be swept under the carpet. The preponderance of ulama-e-soo’ in our time and the deluge of absolute morons bearing the ‘Molvi’ title, are the direct consequences of ignoring the command of Nabi (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Ilm at the higher level is imparted to just any stupid, moron, immoral Tom, Dick and Harry. What type of ulama can therefore be expected from such muck? Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) himself has described such molvis and sheikhs as ‘MUCK’.

“The Saalihoon are departing (in quick succession from this dunya). Then there shall remain only the HUFAALAH (MUCK) such as the chaff/muck/waste of barley or dates. Allah will have no care whatsoever for them.”

The Madaaris are living testimony for this lamentable state of affairs described by Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the illustrious Auliya.

What type of Molvi can a scoundrel dressed in bermuda pants and T-shirt, kicking a ball and indulging in kuffaar sport ever be? The Madrasah management should hang its head in shame for having established sports grounds on the Waqf property to enable students studying Qur’aan and Hadith, carrying around big Tafseer and Hadith kutub, to indulge in haraam kuffaar sport in flagrant rejection of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) banning all sport as haraam. With kuffaar sport, how is it ever possible for the students to have hearts focussing on Ilm, Allah Ta’ala and the Aakhirat?

It appears that the Ulama who are operating Madaaris are scandalously ignorant of the meaning of a Darul Uloom. They fail to understand that in the background of a Darul Uloom is silhouetted Ghaar-e-Hira which is the Fountain of Ilm-e-Wahi which is being imparted in a Darul Uloom or which is supposed to be taught in such an Institution. What affinity does kuffaar sport and other western paraphernalia have with Ghaar-e-Hira?

The Madaaris today are Signs of Qiyaamah. Among these Signs, Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:

“Knowledge (of the Deen) will be acquired for purposes other than the Deen.” Another Sign mentioned in the Hadith is that “the dunya will be pursued with the amal of the Aakhirat”.

These Signs of Qiyaamah are being conspicuously and flagrantly displayed by the Madaaris. That is why so many molvis of this age take to immoral media such as facebook, video and television portraying their ugly snouts which will be branded in Jahannam. Regarding such snouts of molvis hideously portrayed on the haraam immoral media, the Qur’aan Majeed says: “Soon shall We brand him on the snout.”

Having squandered their years at an institution imparting the Knowledge of the Qur’aan for the sake of the dunya, not for the acquisition of Allah’s Pleasure, these corrupt molvis, in pursuit of worldly wealth, name and fame, bootlick the leaders and the affluent members of the community. Thus, they excel in halaalizing riba for the haraam banks. They form haraam so-called ‘shariah’ boards obsequiously serving the fussaaq, fujjaar and kuffaar capitalist bank owners, digging into the kutub and tearing out of context texts to churn out haraam fatwas to legalize all the riba, faasid and baatil bank contracts, plastering these baatil deals with Islamic sounding terminology. They ingest the Fire of Jahannam into their bellies with remuneration paid for fabricating ‘fatwas’ of permissibility for haraam products.

The root of the rot is in the Madaaris. The Asaatizah teach merely to earn, and the students study with the same motives for which secular students pursue secular education at the immoral universities. The two sets of knowledge are mutually repellent. While the objective of universities is worldly prosperity, the Maqsad of Ilm-e-Deen is the Aakhirat. The niyyat of the Taalib-e-Ilm should therefore not be even Da’wat and Tableegh. He should not pursue the Ilm of the Deen to enable him to operate a darul Ifta or to be an Imaam in a Musjid, or to earn a livelihood. His only niyyat should be Allah’s Pleasure and Prosperity in the Aakhirat.

Therefore, only a handful of Students should be allowed to pursue the Aalim-Faadhil course. Such Students are not in need of a long certificate nor to be turbaned. The goal is the Aakhirat, hence there is the need to dispense of these trappings which no longer have any valid meaning. The only purpose for such paraphernalia nowadays is riya and takkabbur. Rectification of niyyat is of imperative importance. There will be no barkat in the Student’s knowledge if his intention is contaminated with a corrupt niyyat.

“Wahab Bin Munabbah said: ‘He who pursues the dunya with the amal of the Aakhirat, Allah Ta’ala will make his heart blind. His name will be listed in the record of Jahannam.”

Sufyaan Thauri (Rahmatullah alayh) said: “My mother said to me: ‘O my son, do not acquire Ilm if it is not your intention to practise accordingly. On the Day of Qiyaamah it (Knowledge) will be a great calamity for you (if your intention is not to practise on it).’”

The corrupt niyyat of the Darul Uloom’s management constrains them to tolerate all the filth and immorality in which today’s students indulge. The objective is to promote the image of the Madrasah, hence the need to expand the buildings and increase the number of students. Riya and takabbur are the motivation for all the jalsahs of today’s madaaris. There is no longer any benefit in these functions which have outlived their utility. Waste, pomp and show are the salient features of these functions which are bereft of Deen. Hadhrat Sufyaan Thauri (Rahmatullah alayh) said:

“Seldom will an Aalim be saved from ujub (vanity and pride) if his circle of dars (his madrasah) is large.”

If a cloud would pass overhead while Hadhrat Sufyaan Thauri (Rahmatullah alayh) was engaged in teaching his students, he would immediately become silent until the cloud had passed, and he would say: “I fear that the cloud may contain stones which will be showered on us.”

Once a student laughed during the dars of Hadhrat A’mash (Rahmatullah alayh). He severely reprimanded the student and expelled him. Reprimanding the student, he said: “You pursue Ilm which Allah Ta’ala has commanded, yet you laugh.” Then Hadhrat A’mash (Rahmatullah alayh) did not speak with this student for two months. What should we comment about students indulging in kuffaar sport, facebook pornography, movies and the like? Their brains and hearts are saturated with the filth of immorality and perversion. Yet, they will be ‘molvis’ tomorrow to subvert and undermine the Deen, and to mislead the masses.

When Hadhrat Sufyaan Thauri (Rahmatullah alayh) had abandoned teaching Hadith, people questioned him in this regard. He explained: “By Allah! If I knew that any of you desires to acquire Ilm only for the Sake of Allah, then I would go to his house to teach him. I will not inconvenience him to come to me.”

When someone asked Hadhrat Sufyaan Bin Uyainah (Rahmatullah alayh) to explain why he does not engage in teaching Hadith, he responded: “By Allah! I do not see any of you fit to learn Hadith nor am I qualified for imparting the knowledge of Hadith.”

“Only he who has these qualities should teach (Hadith). If he is lacking in these attributes, he should not take to this profession (of teaching Hadith). The attributes are:

• He should remind people of the bounties of Allah Ta’ala so that they are grateful to Him• He should remind them of sins so that they resort to Taubah.• He should warn them of the enmity of shaitaan so that people stay aloof from him.”

Hadhrat Ibn Mubaarak (Rahmatullah alayh) was asked: “Who is the most contemptible person?” He said: “He who earns the dunya by means of his Ilm, amal and the Deen.”

Hadhrat Ikramah (Rahmatullah alayh) said: “Impart Knowledge to him who will fulfil the rights of the Ilm. The Aalim should teach such a person who will practically implement the Knowledge.”

Hadhrat Sha’bi (Rahmatullah alayh) said: “The Aadaab of the Ulama demand that they practise on whatever they have learnt. When they make amal, they will abstain from mingling with people. The Aalim will then be lost to the people. They will then search for him. When they search for him, the Aalim fearing fitnah for his Deen, will flee from them.”

It is mentioned in the Hadith that on the Day of Qiyaamah the worst punishment will be inflicted on an Aalim who had not derived benefit from his Knowledge. Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:

“Soon will there dawn an age when all the Aabids (pious worshippers) will be jaahil and all the ulama will be fussaaq.”

That age has already dawned. We are currently in that predicted age. The Ulama are grovelling nowadays in fisq, fujoor, bid’ah and even kufr.

Hadhrat Hasan Basri (Rahmatullah alayh) said: “Do not be from among such people who acquire the Knowledge of Ulama, but acquit themselves as juhala.”

Hadhrat Umar Ibn Khattaab (Radhiyallahu anhu) said: “I fear most for this Ummah such a person who is an Aalim with his tongue, but a jaahil at heart.”

Hadhrat Fudhail Bin Iyaadh (Rahmatullah alayh) said: “I cry when I see the dunya playing with an Aalim. It is indeed lamentable to hear that an Aalim went for Hajj with expenses provided by a trader.”

Hadhrat Hasan Basri (Rahmatullah alayh) said: “The punishment for an Aalim is the death of his heart. The death of the heart occurs when the dunya is pursued with the amal of the Aakhirat. He seeks the proximity of the people of the dunya with the Deen.”

Hadhrat Sayyid Bin Meelab (Rahmatullah alayh) said: “When you see an Aalim at the door of the wealthy, then know that he is a thief.”

Hadhrat Umar Ibn Khattaab (Radhiyallahu anhu) said: “When you see an Aalim having love for the dunya, then be suspicious of him. A man will become engrossed in something he loves.”

Hadhrat Auzaai (Rahmatullah alayh) said: “When the qaari is concerned with the adornment of words, then khushoo’ (humility and fear) disappears from the qaari and the listeners.”

Hadhrat Nabi Isaa (Alayhis salaam) said: “The Aalim who does not act according to his knowledge is like a woman who commits adultery in secret. When she becomes pregnant, she is disgraced. Such will be the condition of an Aalim bereft of practice on the Day of Qiyaamah. Allah Ta’ala will humiliate him”

When Hadhrat Sufyaan Thauri (Rahmatullah alayh) met Hadhrat Fudhail Bin Iyaadh (Rahmatullah alayh), the latter said: “O Assembly of Ulama! Once you were lanterns brightening the cities. But now you are only darkness. Formerly, you were Stars of Guidance. In the darkness of ignorance people would acquire guidance from you. But now you are lost. You visit the rulers, sit on their carpets, eat their food and accept their gifts. Then you sit in the Musjid narrating Ahaadith from Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam). By Allah! Knowledge is not acquired for such acts.”

Hearing this admonition, Hadhrat Sufyaan sobbed uncontrollably.

Hadhrat Sufyaan Bin Uyainah (Rahmatullah alayh) said: “Do not impart Knowledge to a Taalib-e-Ilm if you discern in him an increase in worldly desires. You will be aiding him to enter into Jahannam.”

Hadhrat Zunnun Misri (Rahmatullah alayh) said: “We have seen such people who became increasingly averse with the world as their Knowledge increased. But now we see the converse. Worldly lusts increase with the increase in knowledge. They indulge inordinately in worldly luxuries.”

Hadhrat Sufyaan Bin Uyainah (Rahmatullah alayh) said: “How is it possible for a reciter of the Qur’aan to practise in accordance with its teachings when he sleeps away the entire night, abstains from fasting during the day and consumes haraam and mushtabah food?”

Hadhrat Umar Bin Abdul Azeez (Rahmatullah alayh) said: “If the qaaris were alive (i.e. spiritually), they would have felt burning flames in their stomachs on account of the haraam food they consume. But they do not perceive this because they are dead. They wander around devouring carrion and fire.”

Hadhrat Hasan Basri (Rahmatullah alayh) said: “I abhor that an Aalim fills his stomach with even halaal food. What should I say when an Aalim satiates himself with haraam food?”

Hadhrat Abdullah Bin Mubaarak (Rahmatullah alayh) said: “Nowadays, eating haraam and mushtabah food has overwhelmed the Ulama. It has become their salient habit. They are drowned in the indulgences of lust and the stomach. They have made their knowledge a net to entrap the dunya.”

Hadhrat Fudhail Bin Iyaadh (Rahmatullah alayh) said: “If corruption had not overwhelmed the Ulama, they would have been the best of people. But they have made Knowledge a profession for earning the dunya. Thus, they have become the most contemptible species in the heavens and on earth.”

Hadhrat Sufyaan Thauri (Rahmatullah alayh) said: When you see a Taalib-e-Ilm increasing in knowledge without making amal thereon, then do not impart knowledge to him. If you see the Student being careless regarding haraam and halaal in his food and garments, then do not teach him so that it will not be a proof against you on the Day of Qiyaamah. (Teaching such unfit students will be a calamity on the Day of Qiyaamah).”

Hadhrat Hasan Basri (Rahmatullah alayh) said: “If a person acquires vast knowledge and engages in abundant ibaadat which transforms him into a pillar or like a dried out maskeezah (skin water container), but he is not careful of the food that he ingests, whether it is halaal or haraam, none of his ibaadat is accepted by Allah Ta’ala.”

Hadhrat Abdullah Bin Mubaarak (Rahmatullah alayh) said: “If a man who is the bearer of the Qur’aan (i.e. an Aalim) inclines to the dunya, he has made a mockery of the Aayaat of Allah Ta’ala.”

Imaam Ahmad Bin Hambal (Rahmatullah alayh) would cease teaching a Student if he observed that the student was not spending a portion of the night in ibaadat.

There is an avalanche of similar advice and admonition by the Sahaabah and the Auliya. Abuse of the Amaanat of Ilm-e-Wahi culminates in the production of ulama-e-soo’ who are the primary architects of the immoral lifestyle of the Ummah. Someone asked Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam): “When will it be the Hour (of Qiyaamah)?” Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) responded: “When Amaanat is destroyed.” The Sahaabi asked: “How will Amaanat be destroyed?” Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “When the issue (of trust) is assigned to someone unfit for it.”

This is one of the worse acts of khiyaanat committed by the Madaaris. They assign the sacred Amaanat of Qur’aanic Knowledge to totally unfit students who will manipulate the Ilm for the acquisition of the carrion and filth of the dunya.

We are not suggesting that the Madaaris execute the advices of the Salafus Saaliheen in exactitude. This, we are aware, is not possible in our age. The lofty standard of Taqwa and life of austerity of the Salafus Saaliheen are ideals of a bygone era which will never return to this Ummah. But it is expected that the Madaaris move within the shadow of these advices and admonition. The confines of the Shariah may not be transgressed one iota.

A Madrasah is supposed to be a Bastion of the Deen. It has to be a citadel of Hidaayat. But today, the Madaaris are abodes of zulmat churning out hufaalah on a massive scale. Instead of being guides for the Ummah, these products are the mudhilleen for whom Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had expressed the greatest fear. He said that he feared the aimmah mudhilleen more than even Dajjaal.

It is of vital importance for the Madaaris managements to overhaul the system of ta’leem. This does not mean interference with the Dars-e-Nizaami curriculum. It is the best syllabus and shall remain so. The current system prevailing in the Madaaris has absolutely no affinity with tarbiyat and islaah-e-nafs. In fact, the system enhances sin and transgression. Encouragement for haraam sports, sports fields on Madrasah property, futile jalsahs and functions of riya, haraam and mushtabah food, smoking, even drugs, cellphones, newspapers, un-Islamic dress, emphasis on worldly objectives, etc. have ruined the Madaaris and the Talaba.

“Along with the command of Ibaadat is the command to eat only halaal. Allah Ta’ala says: ‘Eat wholesome things and practise righteousness’.” Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “After the obligation of Imaan and Salaat is the obligation of a halaal earning.” Hadhrat Abdullah Ibn Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) said: “If you perform Salaat in such abundance that your back becomes bent like a bow and if you fast so much that you become as thin as a rake, then too it will not be accepted without the acquisition of Taqwa and abstention from haraam wealth. “Performing ibaadat after consuming food derived from a haraam earning is like erecting a house on foundations of manure. Remember that Halaal Rizq plays a vital role in creating spiritual luster in the heart. Therefore, it is imperative to abstain from haraam wealth. The inculcation of Taqwa is of great importance and need. Taqwa has four ranks as follows:

(1) The first stage is to abstain from such wealth on which the Ulama of the Deen has issued the verdict of prohibition. A man becomes a faasiq by using such wealth. His reliability and integrity are destroyed. This stage of Taqwa is applicable to the general body of Muslims.

(2) The second stage of Taqwa is abstention from doubtful things. Although the Ulama have opined that Mushtabah (doubtful) things are halaal viewing it from the legal aspect, nevertheless, there is the possibility of such things being unlawful. Therefore the Sulaha (pious) abstain from the doubtful things as well. Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) has said: “Abstain from what is doubtful and adopt what is not doubtful.’

(3) The third stage of Taqwa is the Taqwa of the Atqiya (high ranking Auliya). Hadhrat Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) said: “For the fear of falling in haraam, we abstained from nine-tenths of halaal things.’

It is for this reason that we find the pious servants of Allah accepting less than their due. If they are entitled to a hundred coins, they accept one less and when they have to pay others, they give slightly more.

Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said that as long as a Muslim does not abstain from permissible things for the fear of becoming involved in prohibited things, he will not attain the rank of the Atqiya. It is therefore seen that they refrain from even permissible luxuries because today the taste of halaal luxury has been acquired, and tomorrow will be the desire for haraam pleasures. It is also for this very reason that the Qur’aan prohibits gazing with desire at the abundance of wealth and the glitter and pomp of the worldly possessions of the kuffaar. The sweetness of Imaan is reduced by the heart’s desire which the glances of admiration for the wealth of the kuffaar create in one. Love of the world and love for Imaan cannot co-exist in the heart.

To the Atqiya only such wealth is considered lawful in which there is no doubt nor the possibility of future danger to Imaan and Taqwa.

(4) The fourth stage is the Taqwa of the Siddiqeen (the highest category of Auliya). They abstain from eating such food which does not produce in them strength and inducement for Ibaadat and Obedience. Similarly, they abstain from anything which contains even the remotest possibility of disobedience to Allah. The act itself is not sinful, but if they discern the possibility of sin in its media, they refrain from it.

Once Hadhrat Zunnun Misri (rahmatullah alayh) was imprisoned. A pious lady, learning of his suffering and hunger in the prison, prepared some food from her hard-earned halaal money. She sent the food to the jailer to hand it to Zunnun Misri. But, the Shaikh refused to accept the food. He returned it with the comment: “Although the food is halaal, the plate is impure.” By “the plate” he meant the hands of the jailer who was a cruel oppressor. The food no longer remained fit for consumption in view of the hands of a zaalim having touched it.

Hadhrat Bishr Haafi (rahmatullah alayh) would refuse to drink water from the water-works constructed in the cities by tyrannical kings.

The Auliya in this category of Taqwa have abandoned everyone and have taken hold firmly of Allah alone. They never utilized anything which was not purely for the sake of Allah Ta’ala.

Since it is not within the capability of everyone to acquire this lofty degree of Taqwa, it is essential to atleast adopt the Taqwa of ordinary uprighteous people. Never approach near to such things on which the Ulama of the Ummah have issued the verdict of prohibition.